5 Mar 2026
The appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any specific, viable ground with sufficient particulars to impugn the Judge's refusal of leave; general and vague assertions are insufficient and do not justify disturbing the Leave Decision under the controlling precedent.
16 Feb 2026
The appeal was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any specific errors in the Deputy High Court Judge's Leave Decision and advanced only general, bare and vague allegations unsupported by particulars or evidence; under binding precedent the Court will not re-examine the merits on such an appeal and there was no basis to interfere with the Leave Decision.
19 Aug 2025
Extension of time refused because applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable ground or reasonable prospect of success on the intended judicial review; the Board's factual findings and consideration of danger were not shown to be legally wrong.
15 May 2025
Application for extension of time refused because the decision had been served on the applicant's last known address and not returned, the applicant provided no reasonable explanation for the delay or when he learned of the decision, and he identified no arguable error of law or procedural unfairness in the Board's or Judge's decisions so the intended appeal had no realistic prospect of success.
17 Aug 2023
Refusal to extend time was justified because the four-month delay was substantial and inordinate without acceptable explanation or corroboration, the applicant failed to identify any arguable error or provide draft grounds demonstrating a realistic prospect of success, and therefore extension would be futile and was refused.
26 Apr 2023
Extension of time to appeal was refused because the Judge's decision had been sent to the applicant's last known address and not returned, the applicant offered no satisfactory explanation for delay or change of address, and the intended appeal was hopeless as no arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury unreasonableness was identified; therefore no real prospect of success existed and no extension should be granted.
3 Aug 2022
The renewed application for extension of time was refused because the applicant was over four months late and, critically, failed to identify any viable ground of appeal; the intended appeal had no prospect of success so granting an extension would be futile.
16 Jun 2022
The application for extension of time was refused because, despite the short delay of three days and an accepted language difficulty, the applicant failed to identify any arguable grounds or particularise any error in the refusal decision; there was therefore no prospect of success and granting an extension would be futile.
23 Jul 2021
Extension of time to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to show good reason for the delay and, more importantly, the intended appeal had no real prospect of success: the Board's adverse credibility and merits findings were open to it and there were no arguable errors of law or procedure to support judicial review, so it was not in the interests of justice to grant an extension.
13 Jan 2021
The summons for extension of time was dismissed because the Notice of Appeal was served out of time and, critically, the underlying application for leave to apply for judicial review had no reasonable prospect of success since judicial review does not lie against a judicable; accordingly there was no useful purpose in extending time or admitting new evidence.